Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:31 AM - Re: CH 701 Trim Options (Tommy Walker)
2. 05:55 AM - Engine altitude limits (Don Mountain)
3. 06:32 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Larry)
4. 06:32 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Paul Mulwitz)
5. 06:43 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Larry McFarland)
6. 06:56 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Bryan Martin)
7. 07:04 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Bill Denton)
8. 08:29 AM - fuel-sender hole pattern (Zed Smith)
9. 08:48 AM - correction!! (Zed Smith)
10. 08:57 AM - Re: CH 701 Trim Options (Mike Sinclair)
11. 09:14 AM - Re: fuel-sender hole pattern (+ install documentation) (Carlos Sa)
12. 09:42 AM - Primer (Dave VanLanen)
13. 10:00 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits. (Gary Gower)
14. 10:33 AM - Re: Zodiac XL: Your Empty weight / Center of Gravity (Lance Gingell)
15. 10:36 AM - Re: Primer (Paul Mulwitz)
16. 11:02 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Pete Krotje)
17. 11:57 AM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Paul Mulwitz)
18. 01:24 PM - Re: Primer (lynn dingfelder)
19. 01:55 PM - Re: Re: Engine altitude limits ()
20. 03:14 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Bryan Martin)
21. 04:33 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Robin Bellach)
22. 04:33 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits-- How high can a 601HD go? (Ashcraft, Keith -AES)
23. 04:38 PM - Re: Primer (Bob Unternaehrer)
24. 04:57 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Don Mountain)
25. 05:33 PM - Thin gear strut plate solution (Larry McFarland)
26. 05:33 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (n801bh@netzero.com)
27. 06:08 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Paul Mulwitz)
28. 06:28 PM - Tachometers (John anderson)
29. 06:40 PM - Re: Tachometers (wscribb)
30. 06:58 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (cgalley)
31. 07:06 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Larry)
32. 08:10 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Paul Mulwitz)
33. 09:28 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Bryan Martin)
34. 09:40 PM - Re: Engine altitude limits (Bryan Martin)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH 701 Trim Options |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tommy Walker" <twalker@cableone.net>
Charles,
I was told by Zenith that it's electric trim or no trim. I got the
electric.
The last time I flew in the demo, the company pilot told me that he rarely
uses the trim in his plane.
Hope this helps,
Tommy Walker in Alabama
701 ca. 55%?
Do Not Archive
...Can anyone provide me with info on what the trim options are? Also, is
the electric trim worth doing in terms of time and weight?
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601 XL,
I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was getting
with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally out through
the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500 feet
is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing better than
that? What is a good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
Don
601 XL, tail done, working on wings
---------------------------------
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" <lrm01@centurytel.net>
Subaru will, but it has to be a fuel injected one. Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Mountain" <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
Subject: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601
> XL, I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was
> getting with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa
> occasionally out through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's
> limit of about 13,500 feet is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine
> conversions doing better than that? What is a good selection for an
> engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
> whatever.
>
>
> --
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Don,
I would guess all engines have the same problem with running at
altitude - lack of oxygen with lowered air pressure.
Of course you can add some sort of supercharger if you want higher
altitude performance. I am thinking of trying some sort of ram air
approach to increasing my engine's altitude performance, but I don't
really expect it to do much. On the other hand, it won't cost much either.
I guess the issue of performance will follow your engine choice at
all altitudes. The Jabiru 3300 seems to be the highest performance
engine normally used on an XL. It has the most displacement and is
still one of the lightest choices. It also has the most
horsepower. Alas, the price is a little steep compared to auto
conversions but it is still less than Continental or Lycoming choices.
Good luck with your decision.
Paul
XL wings
do not archive
At 05:55 AM 12/27/2005, you wrote:
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for
> my 601 XL, I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits
> everybody was getting with their 601 XL's with various engines. I
> fly from Iowa occasionally out through the Rocky Mountains, but my
> Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500 feet is kind of close. Are
> any of the auto engine conversions doing better than that? What
> is a good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
---------------------------------------------
Paul Mulwitz
32013 NE Dial Road
Camas, WA 98607
---------------------------------------------
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Larry McFarland <larrymc@qconline.com>
Don,
It would seem you need to select an engine that can be fitted with a
supercharger or blower to work at altitudes that strain
most carb systems. Don't know which engine would do that most easily.
Larry McFarland
do not archive
Don Mountain wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601 XL,
I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was getting
with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally out
through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500 feet
is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing better than
that? What is a good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was still climbing at about 150 ft/min.
That was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp at sea level. It doesn't matter
what kind of engine you use, you're only going to get about 50% of your sea
level power out of it at that altitude without a turbocharger. If you want
adequate performance at that altitude, you either need a bigger engine, a
lighter load or a turbocharger. Don't forget that the FAA requires the pilot
to use supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 8:55 AM, Don Mountain at mountain4don@yahoo.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601 XL,
> I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was getting
> with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally out
> through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500
> feet is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing better
> than that? What is a good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
Rotax 914?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bryan Martin
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was still climbing at about 150 ft/min.
That was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp at sea level. It doesn't matter
what kind of engine you use, you're only going to get about 50% of your sea
level power out of it at that altitude without a turbocharger. If you want
adequate performance at that altitude, you either need a bigger engine, a
lighter load or a turbocharger. Don't forget that the FAA requires the pilot
to use supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 8:55 AM, Don Mountain at mountain4don@yahoo.com wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601
XL,
> I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was
getting
> with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally
out
> through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about
13,500
> feet is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing
better
> than that? What is a good selection for an engine to reach these
altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | fuel-sender hole pattern |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
For those who may want additional explanation about the goofy SAE 5-hole fuel-sender bolt pattern used on most fuel-level senders, there is a four-page PDF at www.egauges.com/pdf/vdo/0-515-010-369.pdf
Although not an aircraft-related site, you can determine mechanical float orientation
and see why it'll only fit in ONE position.
For electronic/capacitance probes you'd not worry about the float arm.
It may be easier to use your sender as a template.
Regards,
Zed/701/R912/90%etc
do not archive
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net>
The Digit Wizard isn't working this morning....it's 396.pdf, not 369.
correct address is www.egauges.com/pdf/vdo/0-515-010-396.pdf
Zed
do not archive
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH 701 Trim Options |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Mike Sinclair <mike.sinclair@att.net>
For what it's worth, I suspect the reason he doesn't use the trim is because
he has it set where the elevator is fairly neutral. Stick forces are light in
this airplane and a lot of adjustments to the trim are not necessary flying
around the pattern or local. I have the electric trim in mine and am very
happy with it. Simple to install and not much weight added. Minor adjustments
for cross country and that's about it. For slow flight it can be trimmed to
where I can use both hands on the camera when taking pictures. Then readjust
for cruise and you can still stay hands off, though I do have to keep both
feet on the rudder pedals (the tail wants to walk a bit) and rest a knee
against the stick to keep it level since with just me in it, it feels just a
tad heavy on the left wing. That said, I believe that if I had not put the
trim on the elevator on the original build, it would have been a retrofit
project very shortly after 1st flight. You won't be sorry if you go ahead and
install the trim. An added note, I ran the wires to the rear of the airplane
to a cannon plug and if the elevator needs to be removed you can just unplug
it. Zip ties secure to two plug ends so that they don't vibrate apart, and
makes the removal of the elevator fairly painless.
Mike Sinclair N701TD
Tommy Walker wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Tommy Walker" <twalker@cableone.net>
>
> Charles,
>
> I was told by Zenith that it's electric trim or no trim. I got the
> electric.
>
> The last time I flew in the demo, the company pilot told me that he rarely
> uses the trim in his plane.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Tommy Walker in Alabama
> 701 ca. 55%?
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> ...Can anyone provide me with info on what the trim options are? Also, is
> the electric trim worth doing in terms of time and weight?
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: fuel-sender hole pattern (+ install documentation) |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Carlos Sa <carlosfsa@yahoo.com>
Zed, I believe you meant:
http://www.egauges.com/pdf/vdo/0-515-010-396.pdf
BTW, there is a list of all install documentation here:
http://www.egauges.com/Inst_PDF.asp?Cart
Might be of use to somebody...
Carlos
Zed Smith <zsmith3rd@earthlink.net> wrote: --> Zenith-List message posted by:
Zed Smith
For those who may want additional explanation about the goofy SAE 5-hole fuel-sender bolt pattern used on most fuel-level senders, there is a four-page PDF at www.egauges.com/pdf/vdo/0-515-010-369.pdf
---------------------------------
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave VanLanen" <davevanlanen@sbcglobal.net>
I found a local source of zinc chromate primer, but I'm wondering if it is
acceptable to use. I found it at a Diamond Vogel Paint Center here in
Madison, WI. The clerk defined it to me as a xylene-based product, with a
greenish gray tint, part number PN 0513, and it comes in a gallon for
$29.34. Can anyone tell me if this is the "right stuff"? I know I can
order from Aircraft Spruce, but it would cost me more for a quart by the
time I add in shipping costs.
I also talked with a person from a body shop supply dealer in town, and he
told me they have a self-etching primer product, a 2-part product, that he
says replaces zinc chromate. I think the total cost was about $38 for the
two parts, which would make a total of 2 quarts. He said that the product
provides the same corrosion protection as zinc chromate. Any thoughts on
this?
Thanks in advance,
Dave Van Lanen
Madison, WI
601 XL
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits. |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Gary Gower <ggower_99@yahoo.com>
WW is doing some research with a turbochager installed in a Corvair,
I am waiting for his comments, given that here we fly at high altitudes, Our
strip is at 5,000 ft ASL and everything close is over 6,000, going to the coast
is over the mountains at 11,000, no problem with the 701 912S but we dont
know what will be with the XL...
We are now thinking on the the Jab 3300, but when the XL will be close enough
for the engine we will make the final choice.
Good luck in our search..
Saludos
Gary Gower.
Larry McFarland <larrymc@qconline.com> wrote:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Larry McFarland
Don,
It would seem you need to select an engine that can be fitted with a
supercharger or blower to work at altitudes that strain
most carb systems. Don't know which engine would do that most easily.
Larry McFarland
do not archive
Don Mountain wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601 XL,
I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was getting with
their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally out through
the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500 feet is
kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing better than that?
What is a good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
---------------------------------
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Zodiac XL: Your Empty weight / Center of Gravity |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Lance Gingell" <lgingell@matrix-logic.com>
Martin,
My empty weight is 712lbs, CG is 264.8.
I'm still not painted yet, so that will add a bit. I have also added a
baggage floor carpet since. This was standard Y-stick, baggage lockers,
lights, elec aileron trim, new larger elevator trim.
Engine is a Jabiru 3300 with a wood sensenich 64ZK51 prop. Panel is
D10A/Garmin 296/GRT EIS6000/SL40 COM/GTX327 XPDR plus a couple of steam
gauges (ASI/ALT) + Vert card Compass. I have fuses & switches, not
breakers.
..lance
Zodiac XL/3300
http://lancegingell.com/plane.asp
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
> The clerk defined it to me as a xylene-based product,
Xylene is a VERY TOXIC solvent. I strongly recommend you NOT use it
unless you always have the appropriate breathing equipment in
use. Even then, I would avoid it.
Paul
XL wings
---------------------------------------------
Paul Mulwitz
32013 NE Dial Road
Camas, WA 98607
---------------------------------------------
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" <pkrotje@athenet.net>
The Israeli government is using Jabiru's in unmanned vehicles in the stock
configuration to 24,000 ft. It must really be sucking hard for air up there
but it shows it can be done. We have only been up to 14,000 with our Jabiru
J250 and still had 3000 rpm at full throttle.
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul Mulwitz
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz
--> <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Don,
I would guess all engines have the same problem with running at altitude -
lack of oxygen with lowered air pressure.
Of course you can add some sort of supercharger if you want higher altitude
performance. I am thinking of trying some sort of ram air approach to
increasing my engine's altitude performance, but I don't really expect it to
do much. On the other hand, it won't cost much either.
I guess the issue of performance will follow your engine choice at all
altitudes. The Jabiru 3300 seems to be the highest performance engine
normally used on an XL. It has the most displacement and is still one of
the lightest choices. It also has the most horsepower. Alas, the price is
a little steep compared to auto conversions but it is still less than
Continental or Lycoming choices.
Good luck with your decision.
Paul
XL wings
do not archive
At 05:55 AM 12/27/2005, you wrote:
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my
> 601 XL, I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits
> everybody was getting with their 601 XL's with various engines. I
> fly from Iowa occasionally out through the Rocky Mountains, but my
> Piper Cherokee's limit of about 13,500 feet is kind of close. Are
> any of the auto engine conversions doing better than that? What is a
> good selection for an engine to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
---------------------------------------------
Paul Mulwitz
32013 NE Dial Road
Camas, WA 98607
---------------------------------------------
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Pete,
Are you aware of anybody working on a turbo/super charger for the
3300? Do you have any thoughts on this?
(This seems to me to be the best way for a "Sport Pilot" to go fast
without violating any of the rules.)
Paul
XL wings
do not archive
At 11:01 AM 12/27/2005, you wrote:
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" <pkrotje@athenet.net>
>
>The Israeli government is using Jabiru's in unmanned vehicles in the stock
>configuration to 24,000 ft. It must really be sucking hard for air up there
>but it shows it can be done. We have only been up to 14,000 with our Jabiru
>J250 and still had 3000 rpm at full throttle.
>
>Pete
> ====================================================
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "lynn dingfelder" <ding@tbscc.com>
Dave,
My research has led me to a two part product made by PPG,
available at auto stores that carry the PPG line of paints. DX1791 is
called a self etching wash primer. DX1792 is the catalyst. A thin coat is
sprayed on each surface to be joined, or the entire surface depending on the
desired level of protection. The sprayed layer is semi-transparent. A little
airbrush is all that's needed for joint surfaces, and extra mixed material
will keep for several days in a freezer. Details are available at
www.ppg.com/crrefinish/phase1/frmFindProduct.asp
A quart of each will do an entire plane interior if treating joints
only, and adds very little weight.
Lynn Dingfelder
Corry, PA
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: <dredmoody@cox.net>
Tragically expensive and only 115 hp but it does perform well at high altitude.
Ed
>
> From: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
> Date: 2005/12/27 Tue AM 10:04:11 EST
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> Rotax 914?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bryan Martin
> To: Zenith List
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
>
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
>
> I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was still climbing at about 150 ft/min.
> That was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp at sea level. It doesn't matter
> what kind of engine you use, you're only going to get about 50% of your sea
> level power out of it at that altitude without a turbocharger. If you want
> adequate performance at that altitude, you either need a bigger engine, a
> lighter load or a turbocharger. Don't forget that the FAA requires the pilot
> to use supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.
>
>
> --
> Bryan Martin
> N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
> do not archive.
>
>
> on 12/27/05 8:55 AM, Don Mountain at mountain4don@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
> >
> > As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my 601
> XL,
> > I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody was
> getting
> > with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa occasionally
> out
> > through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit of about
> 13,500
> > feet is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine conversions doing
> better
> > than that? What is a good selection for an engine to reach these
> altitudes?
> >
> > Don
> > 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
The engine isn't producing much power at that altitude but the RPV is so
much lighter than a manned aircraft, it's enough power to do the job.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 2:01 PM, Pete Krotje at pkrotje@athenet.net wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" <pkrotje@athenet.net>
>
> The Israeli government is using Jabiru's in unmanned vehicles in the stock
> configuration to 24,000 ft. It must really be sucking hard for air up there
> but it shows it can be done. We have only been up to 14,000 with our Jabiru
> J250 and still had 3000 rpm at full throttle.
>
> Pete
>
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Robin Bellach" <601zv@ritternet.com>
Don,
I've chosen the Corvair for my XL, and have installed the TB-10 turbo cam
in hopes that WW will complete a satisfactory turbo setup. I experienced
that same ceiling problem with my C-172 out west. Even with the turbo cam
and naturally aspirated my Corvair generated more power than an O200 on WW's
test stand so I expect my 601 ZenVair to outperform my old 172 even if I
don't install a turbo.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Mountain" <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
To: "Zenith" <zenith-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 7:55 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> As I work through the decision process of selecting an engine for my
601 XL, I was wondering what sort of practical altitude limits everybody
was getting with their 601 XL's with various engines. I fly from Iowa
occasionally out through the Rocky Mountains, but my Piper Cherokee's limit
of about 13,500 feet is kind of close. Are any of the auto engine
conversions doing better than that? What is a good selection for an engine
to reach these altitudes?
>
> Don
> 601 XL, tail done, working on wings
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
whatever.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits--Zenith-List: How high can a 601HD |
go?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Ashcraft, Keith -AES" <Keith.Ashcraft@itt.com>
List
Remember this message from Bruce back on 10/16/2005
(Hope you don't mind Bruce)
Keith
*****************************************************************************************
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bruce Bockius" <bruce@whiteantelopesoftware.com>
I had access to a portable O2 system and so decided to find out how high
mine could go today.
The answer is: I still don't know and won't unless I get an IFR rating to
enter Class A airspace. I stopped at 17,500 MSL.
Conditions:
9 gallons fuel & 165lb pilot onboard.
Temperature at altitude was 19 deg F, RH 22%, press 30.145", which means
Density Altitude was 18,697ft.
The climb rate was around 100-150fpm. Since I wasn't going to go any closer
to FL180 I leveled off and took some readings. Full-throttle RPM on the
Stratus EA-81 (highly "detuned") was down to 4100. IAS was 56kts. It took
36 minutes to climb from Meadow Lake Airport (00V, 6840ft), near Colorado
Springs to 17500... I guess Bruce Bohannon doesn't have to worry too much ;)
I was intersting to have to look down onto Pike's Peak.
-Bruce/601HD/TDO/Stratus
***************************
Bruce Bockius
Black Forest, CO, USA
http://www.WhiteAntelopeSoftware.com/zodiac
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bryan Martin
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
The engine isn't producing much power at that altitude but the RPV is so
much lighter than a manned aircraft, it's enough power to do the job.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 2:01 PM, Pete Krotje at pkrotje@athenet.net wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Pete Krotje" <pkrotje@athenet.net>
>
> The Israeli government is using Jabiru's in unmanned vehicles in the stock
> configuration to 24,000 ft. It must really be sucking hard for air up there
> but it shows it can be done. We have only been up to 14,000 with our Jabiru
> J250 and still had 3000 rpm at full throttle.
>
> Pete
>
************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are proprietary and intended solely
for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you
have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that
any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of ITT Industries, Inc. The recipient should
check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. ITT Industries
accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted
by this e-mail.
************************************
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Bob Unternaehrer" <shilocom@mcmsys.com>
Dave ... Zinc Chromate has been used for years and is OK especially on the
inside and between joints. I would NOT use it on the outside where you want
to top coat over it because many of the MODERN 2 part paints will lift it.
The Epoxy pimer is the best but you have to mix about each time you use it.
The one I use will keep in the refrigerator for several days after
mixing,,,probably a couple of weeks. Bob U.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave VanLanen" <davevanlanen@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Zenith-List: Primer
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Dave VanLanen"
<davevanlanen@sbcglobal.net>
>
> I found a local source of zinc chromate primer, but I'm wondering if it is
> acceptable to use. I found it at a Diamond Vogel Paint Center here in
> Madison, WI. The clerk defined it to me as a xylene-based product, with a
> greenish gray tint, part number PN 0513, and it comes in a gallon for
> $29.34. Can anyone tell me if this is the "right stuff"? I know I can
> order from Aircraft Spruce, but it would cost me more for a quart by the
> time I add in shipping costs.
>
> I also talked with a person from a body shop supply dealer in town, and he
> told me they have a self-etching primer product, a 2-part product, that he
> says replaces zinc chromate. I think the total cost was about $38 for the
> two parts, which would make a total of 2 quarts. He said that the product
> provides the same corrosion protection as zinc chromate. Any thoughts on
> this?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave Van Lanen
> Madison, WI
> 601 XL
>
>
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
Thank you very much Bryan. Thats about the performance I am looking for. I
don't intend to go over the 14,000 limit and don't want to turbocharge or anything
exotic. I just didn't know if the auto engine conversions had a much lower
limit than a Lycoming or other aircraft engine. If they were in the 8000
foot limit range, then I would probably spend the money and go for something
else.
Don
601XL, tail done, working on wings
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin
>I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was
>still climbing at about 150 ft/min. That
>was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp
>at sea level. It doesn't matter what kind
>of engine you use, you're only going to
>get about 50% of your sea level power
>out of it at that altitude without a
>turbocharger. If you want adequate
>performance at that altitude, you either
>need a bigger engine, a lighter load or
>a turbocharger. Don't forget that the
>FAA requires the pilot to use
>supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.--
>
>Bryan Martin
>N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
>
do not archive.
---------------------------------
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Thin gear strut plate solution |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Larry McFarland <larrymc@qconline.com>
Hi guys,
I finally received a response today from Chris on a proposed solution
for replacing the 1/8-inch gear strut plates that have occasionally
cracked from the struts. This was submitted about 3 weeks ago and the
following two paragraphs are part of what was sent to Zenith.
I made a weld-assembly of drilled 3/16-inch gear plates and 2-inch
diameter, -inch wall 4130 tubes that were welded away from the
airplane. These were turned down the thickness of the strut tube seen
above to permit a snug, sliding fit into the strut tubes. They are then
axially aligned on the plane with the forks and wheels mounted, and then
allowed to rest on the stub shoulder. They are drilled front to back and
bolted using an AN-4 or 5 aircraft bolt and Nylock nut. Proper fit with
a stress-reducing radius at the shoulder plus a wall thickness of .125
inside the strut tube would provide strong attachment and solid fit that
should not be a problem for wheel pants configured per Zenith.
I am submitting this process and method to replace the thin strut plates
with thicker ones to avoid re-welding the tubes or having to build new
gear struts. The best part is, of course, it avoids performing any
welding near the aircraft.
Chris has given his approval on this approach and was satisfied that a
single-bolt attachment was adequate for the job.
I posted the drawing for anyone that may feel the need to replace their
gear plates. You still need to know whether your struts are .065 or
.058 wall
before turning the insert tubes.
See the link below for the drawing and print it if it satisfies your needs.
http://www.macsmachine.com/images/completion/full/gear-plate-and-strut.gif
Have a Happy New Year,
Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "n801bh@netzero.com" <n801bh@netzero.com>
Don't forget that the FAA requires the pilot
to use supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
It has been over 25 years since ground school but I think the rule is " A pilot
needs O2 when at 12,500 msl or higher for longer then 15 minutes" The passengers
need to be supplied O2 at 14,000 but they are not required to use it. I can
post my findings on my 801 at high altitudes if any one is interested.. Happy
New Year...........
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
Don't forget that the FAA requires the pilot
to use supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
It has been over 25 years since ground schoolbut I think the rule is " A pilot
needs O2 when at 12,500 msl or higherfor longer then 15 minutes" The passengers
need to be supplied O2 at 14,000 but they are not required to use it. I can
post my findings on my 801 at high altitudes if any one is interested.. Happy
New Year...........
.
BenHaas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
Hi Ben,
Yes, over the years the FAA has reduced its minimum oxygen
standards. When I was first flying, they required anyone over 10,000
for 1/2 hour to use oxygen. I recently looked into this and learned
people who smoke already run with 10% of their hemoglobin unavailable
for oxygen due to carbon monoxide.
I still use 10,000 as my limit for running without oxygen. I suspect
it is not a coincidence that this is also the maximum altitude for
sport pilots.
Paul
XL wings
do not archive
>It has been over 25 years since ground school but I think the rule
>is " A pilot needs O2 when at 12,500 msl or higher for longer then
>15 minutes" The passengers need to be supplied O2 at 14,000 but
>they are not required to use it. I can post my findings on my 801 at
>high altitudes if any one is interested.. Happy New Year...........
>
>
>Ben Haas
>N801BH
>www.haaspowerair.com
>
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John anderson" <ande437@bellsouth.net>
Hi,
Can anyone tell me the part numbers or ordering procedure for the tach and sensor
William W. uses on his Corvair engines. It is a Stewart Warner but I do not
know which will match the sensor he uses.
Thanks,
John
Do not archive
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "wscribb" <wscribb@centurytel.net>
Hello John,
For my XL I'm using a Stewart Warner tach model #82636 along with the sender
unit model #82646.
Cheers.
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John anderson
Subject: Zenith-List: Tachometers
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John anderson"
--> <ande437@bellsouth.net>
Hi,
Can anyone tell me the part numbers or ordering procedure for the tach and
sensor William W. uses on his Corvair engines. It is a Stewart Warner but I
do not know which will match the sensor he uses.
Thanks,
John
Do not archive
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Have driven to the top of Pike's Peak several times. Modern engines with
altitude compensation have no problem. On the 49 Ford we had to run the
vacuum windshield wipers in a vain attempt to lean the old flat head.
Cy Galley - Chair,
AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Mountain" <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>
> Thank you very much Bryan. Thats about the performance I am looking for.
> I don't intend to go over the 14,000 limit and don't want to turbocharge
> or anything exotic. I just didn't know if the auto engine conversions
> had a much lower limit than a Lycoming or other aircraft engine. If they
> were in the 8000 foot limit range, then I would probably spend the money
> and go for something else.
>
> Don
> 601XL, tail done, working on wings
>
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin
>
> >I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was
> >still climbing at about 150 ft/min. That
> >was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp
> >at sea level. It doesn't matter what kind
> >of engine you use, you're only going to
> >get about 50% of your sea level power
> >out of it at that altitude without a
> >turbocharger. If you want adequate
> >performance at that altitude, you either
> >need a bigger engine, a lighter load or
> >a turbocharger. Don't forget that the
> >FAA requires the pilot to use
> >supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.--
> >
> >Bryan Martin
> >N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
> >
> do not archive.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
> whatever.
>
>
>
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" <lrm01@centurytel.net>
That's exactly right. That's why a modern fuel injected auto engine with
attitude compensation, which they all have, will work fine. Larry,
www.skyhawg.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
> Have driven to the top of Pike's Peak several times. Modern engines with
> altitude compensation have no problem. On the 49 Ford we had to run the
> vacuum windshield wipers in a vain attempt to lean the old flat head.
>
> Cy Galley - Chair,
> AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
> A Service Project of Chapter 75
> EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
> EAA Sport Pilot
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Don Mountain" <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Don Mountain <mountain4don@yahoo.com>
>>
>> Thank you very much Bryan. Thats about the performance I am looking
>> for.
>> I don't intend to go over the 14,000 limit and don't want to turbocharge
>> or anything exotic. I just didn't know if the auto engine conversions
>> had a much lower limit than a Lycoming or other aircraft engine. If
>> they
>> were in the 8000 foot limit range, then I would probably spend the money
>> and go for something else.
>>
>> Don
>> 601XL, tail done, working on wings
>>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin
>>
>> >I've had my XL up to 13,500 and it was
>> >still climbing at about 150 ft/min. That
>> >was with a Subaru EA81 rated at 100 hp
>> >at sea level. It doesn't matter what kind
>> >of engine you use, you're only going to
>> >get about 50% of your sea level power
>> >out of it at that altitude without a
>> >turbocharger. If you want adequate
>> >performance at that altitude, you either
>> >need a bigger engine, a lighter load or
>> >a turbocharger. Don't forget that the
>> >FAA requires the pilot to use
>> >supplemental oxygen above 14,000 ft.--
>> >
>> >Bryan Martin
>> >N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
>> >
>> do not archive.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
>> whatever.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz <p.mulwitz@worldnet.att.net>
It seems to me that altitude compensation merely adjusts the mixture
so the fuel burns well. Likewise, fuel injection gives even fuel
distribution so it burns nicely. Neither of those can help with the
decreasing manifold pressure caused by the decreasing outside air pressure.
All reciprocating engines must lose power as they increase
altitude. The only way to maintain sea level power at higher
altitudes is to compress the intake air with a turbocharger or
supercharger or similar device.
I plan to do some work on increasing manifold pressure using some
variation on air scoops. This may help a little bit by compressing
the air entering the engine. I am sure this will be severely
limited but I intend to do it with no moving parts so it will also be
very inexpensive.
Paul
XL wings
At 07:06 PM 12/27/2005, you wrote:
>That's exactly right. That's why a modern fuel injected auto engine with
>attitude compensation, which they all have, will work fine. Larry,
---------------------------------------------
Paul Mulwitz
32013 NE Dial Road
Camas, WA 98607
---------------------------------------------
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
It doesn't matter if the engine is fuel injected or not. If it's not
supercharged, the engine will only have about 60% of its sea level power
available at 13,500 feet. This assumes that some form of altitude
compensation, either manual or automatic, is used to maintain the proper
mixture. Fuel injection will allow the same engine to operate a bit more
efficiently and give a bit more power. But with only half the oxygen
available, only half as much power can be produced. It's a simple law of
physics.
If the airplane has lots of excess power available at sea level, 60% power
may be good enough for flight at 13,500 altitude. With only 80 hp available
at sea level you might not make it to 13,500 feet in an XL unless it is very
lightly loaded. With 100 hp available you can make it with some power to
spare as long as you can maintain the proper mixture. The more power you
have at sea level, the better off you'll be at altitude. The altitude limit
of an airplane is not just a function of the engine, it's also a function of
the weight that engine has to lift.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 10:06 PM, Larry at lrm01@centurytel.net wrote:
> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Larry" <lrm01@centurytel.net>
>
> That's exactly right. That's why a modern fuel injected auto engine with
> attitude compensation, which they all have, will work fine. Larry,
> www.skyhawg.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Engine altitude limits
>
>
>> --> Zenith-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>>
>> Have driven to the top of Pike's Peak several times. Modern engines with
>> altitude compensation have no problem. On the 49 Ford we had to run the
>> vacuum windshield wipers in a vain attempt to lean the old flat head.
>>
>> Cy Galley - Chair,
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Engine altitude limits |
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Bryan Martin <bryanmmartin@comcast.net>
Sec. 91.211 Supplemental oxygen.
(a) General. No person may operate a civil aircraft of U.S.
registry--
(1) At cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500 feet (MSL) up to and
including 14,000 feet (MSL) unless the required minimum flight crew is
provided with and uses supplemental oxygen for that part of the flight
at those altitudes that is of more than 30 minutes duration;
(2) At cabin pressure altitudes above 14,000 feet (MSL) unless the
required minimum flight crew is provided with and uses supplemental
oxygen during the entire flight time at those altitudes; and
(3) At cabin pressure altitudes above 15,000 feet (MSL) unless each
occupant of the aircraft is provided with supplemental oxygen.
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL, Stratus Subaru.
do not archive.
on 12/27/05 8:31 PM, n801bh@netzero.com at n801bh@netzero.com wrote:
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> /////
> It has been over 25 years since ground school but I think the rule is " A
> pilot needs O2 when at 12,500 msl or higher for longer then 15 minutes" The
> passengers need to be supplied O2 at 14,000 but they are not required to use
> it. I can post my findings on my 801 at high altitudes if any one is
> interested.. Happy New Year...........
>
>
> Ben Haas
> N801BH
> www.haaspowerair.com
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|